1997 PLP 740 (CLC)

Date of hearing: 11th July, 1995. Through this writ petition the petitioner challenges the order dated 14‑9‑1992 and order dated 1.2‑4‑1993 passed by the University against the petitioner. On 4‑6‑1992, the petitioner was charge‑sheeted and the allegations made in the charge‑sheet were as under:‑‑ "You joined Roll No.72 in tearing the answer sheets of other students who were calm and quiet and did want to continue their work while appearing in the paper of Hydraulic Machinery of 1st Year Exam. (Annual‑92) in B.Sc. Mech. Engineering, held on 19.‑5‑1992. You snatched away the answer sheets of other students and tote those in a rash mood. "

2. In the reply to the said charge‑sheet, the charges were denied on 14‑9‑1992. However, penalty was imposed on the petitioner whereby all his answer books of the entire examination of 1st Year Examination (Annual 1992) in B.Sc. Mechanical Engineering starting from 2‑5‑1992 were cancelled. He was also debarred from appearing in the examination of the University for one year. The petitioner filed appeal against the same which was partly accepted by the Appellate Committee granting the petitioner reduction in penalty and he was debarred from appearing in the examination only for a period of six months w.e.f. 2‑5‑1992.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner was discriminated as the other four students who were placed in the similar situation were only fined Rs.500 as is evident from the order dated 4‑8‑1991 passed by the University (Copy at Annexure‑I/1).

4. The main argument addressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that impugned order is hit by Article 25 of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973 as the petitioner was discriminated by the respondent/University. Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out to the affidavit of Deputy Superintendent, which has supported the petitioner.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents states that the case of the petitioner was placed before the unfair means committee whereas the case of Farhan Shafi and others was sent to the Disciplinary Committee and both the committees passed different orders.

6. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 13‑7‑1993, the petitioner was provisionally allowed to appear in the 2nd Year Examination which started from 26‑7‑1993. The petitioner has since then been studying under the order of the Court and was allowed provisionally to appear in the 3rd Year Examination by this Court.

7. Even according to the appellate order which was passed against the petitioner maximum punishment was for six months which has long ago expired. The petitioner has suffered enough agony during this whole period. He has been studying wholeheartedly and in disciplined manner.

8. Resultantly this writ petition is accepted and the impugned orders are set aside. The respondent/University shall, therefore, declare result of the petitioner and in case he is found successful in both examinations, he shall be promoted to next class according to the Rules and Regulations of the University, and shall be allowed to sit in the next higher class. No order as to costs. A.A/J‑107/1???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????? Petition accepted.